Arlyn W. Nordhorn v. Ladish Company, Inc., a Wisconsin Corporation Armco, Inc., an Ohio Corporation

Good Law
9 F.3d 1402·93 Daily Journal DAR 14703·1993 WL 474617·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 29925·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8530
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 19, 199392-35472California2,141 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schroeder, J.

In this breach of contract suit, the district court dismissed Arlyn Nordhom’s claim against Ladish Company and Armco, Inc. on res judicata grounds, holding that Nordhorn should have raised this claim in an earlier suit against HITCO, a former sister company of Ladish. Nordhorn appeals. We reverse because Nordhorn’s claim in this case is based on a different contractual relationship and is against different parties than those involved in the preceding litigation. Res ju-dicata principles therefore do not apply to bar this litigation. We reverse and remand for further proceedings, including a determination of whether this claim is barred by the statute of limitations.

I

In the early 1980’s, HITCO and Ladish Company were both subsidiaries of Armco, Inc. At that time, Armco owned a “family of companies” that manufactured different airplane parts. Ladish and HITCO did not manufacture the same products, although as sister companies, they often engaged in collective marketing efforts. In 1983, Nordhorn promoted both HITCO and Ladish products to Grumman and Rohr, general contractors bidding on Gulfstream and Fokker Aircraft’s “G-IV/F100 Program.” The relationship between HITCO, Ladish,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.